DETAILED ACTION
Claims 11-34 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
The most recent 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejection has been withdrawn in light of the current claim amendment.
The most recent claim objection has been withdrawn in light of the current claim amendment.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 11-34 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 09/17/2025. Some of these drawings are acceptable.
The drawings are objected to because of the following:
The line quality of figures 1, 3A, 4-7, and 14-16, when zoomed in, illustrate an inconsistent line quality. 37 CFR 1.84 (Standards for Drawings), section L (Character of lines, numbers, and letters) states: “All drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black (except for color drawings), sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined”. The drawings should be viewed in the USPTO’s patent center in order to see this problem.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 13-15 and 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 13 (and, similarly claim 27) cite: “[...] a diverter configured to redirect the first tool into any one of the second flow path or the third flow path.” Examiner acknowledges broad support for the limitation(s) in paragraph [0113] and figures 8-9 in the instant specification. However, the claim(s) lack written description support because the claim defines the invention in functional language specifying a desired result (i.e., redirecting) but the disclosure fails to sufficiently identify how the function is performed or the result is achieved. Rather, the instant specification merely discloses generic language of having “profiles and/or diverters” associated with “tool 812” which is used to remove “cartridge 902”, absent specific detail as to how exactly this is function of diverting is being done.
Claim 14 (and, similarly claims 15, 26, & 28) cite: “[...] at least one profile disposed in the elongated Y-block and configured to rotate and land the first tool at a particular depth and orientation.” Examiner acknowledges broad support for the limitations in paragraphs [0064, 0095-0096, 0113] and figures 3A, 7-9 in the instant specification. However, the claim(s) lack written description support because the claim defines the invention in functional language specifying a desired result (i.e., redirecting) but the disclosure fails to sufficiently identify how the function is performed or the result is achieved. Rather, the instant specification merely discloses generic language of having a “profile” (which appears to be the top of the interior wall/partition which splits the second the third flow paths) without, absent specific detail as to how exactly this is function of allowing for rotation and for it to land in a particular orientation is being done.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 11-12, 16-18, 25, and 29-31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alghamdi (US Publication Number 2024/0287882 A1; herein “Alghamdi”) in view of Al Majid et al. (US Publication Number 2023/0313662 A1; herein “Al Majid”).
In regard to claim 11, Alghamdi discloses: A system (abstract, paragraphs [0016-0024, 0031-0034], and figures 1 & 3) comprising:
an elongated Y-block (i.e., 302 or 304) for placement in a wellbore (116) comprising:
a working space (as shown in the annotated figure 3 below),
a first flow path fluidically coupled with a first side of the working space (as shown in the annotated figure 3 below),
a second flow path fluidically coupled with a second side of the working space (as shown in the annotated figure 3 below), and
a third flow path fluidically coupled with the second side of the working space (as shown in the annotated figure 3 below), and
a cartridge (310) configured for insertion into at least one of the second flow path or the third flow path via the first flow path and the working space (as shown in the annotated figure 3 below | also, see paragraphs [0031-0034]), wherein the cartridge includes one or more devices to separate fluids (Examiner notes that the “blanking plug” intrinsically comprises sealing and anchoring devices to allow for “separating fluids”) and wherein the working space is configured to enable a first tool to remove the cartridge from at least one of the second flow path and the third flow path while the Y-block is downhole (paragraphs [0033, 0036]).
PNG
media_image1.png
865
781
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Though Alghamdi intrinsically teaches for its “cartridge” to comprise of one or more devices to separate fluids, Alghamdi is explicitly silent in regard to the limitation.
Nonetheless, Al Majid teaches a similar type of y-block tool comprising a similar type of installable/retrievable “cartridge” (20) — paragraphs [0023-0028, 0031-0033] and figures 1-2, similar to that of Alghamdi. Al Majid teaches for the “cartridge” (20) to comprise of one or more devices (i.e., such as, but not limited to, 24 and 25) to separate the fluids (paragraphs [0023-0028, 0031-0033] and figures 1-2).
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to simply substitute the “cartridge”, as taught by Alghamdi with that of Al Majid, to yield the predictable result of preventing fluid circulation around the ESP and resulting ESP shutdown due to a variety of possible causes (paragraph [0002] of Al Majid). See MPEP 2143, section I, subsection B.
In regard to claim 12, Alghamdi further discloses: a second tool configured to insert the cartridge into at least one of the second flow path or the third flow path, wherein the second tool can be the first tool (paragraphs [0033, 0036]).
In regard to claim 16, in view of the modification of the preceding claim, Alghamdi further discloses: wherein the cartridge (as taught by both Alghamdi and Al Majid) includes a component (i.e., intrinsic seal element of “cartridge”, as taught by Alghamdi, and seal ring 25, as taught by Al Majid) of an assembly to separate fluids (paragraphs [0033, 0036] — Alghamadi and paragraphs [0023-0028, 0031-0033] and figures 1-2 — Al Majid).
In regard to claim 17, in view of the modification of the preceding claim, Alghamdi further discloses: wherein the cartridge (as taught by both Alghamdi and Al Majid) includes at least a component (i.e., intrinsic seal element of “cartridge”, as taught by Alghamdi, and seal ring 25, as taught by Al Majid) of an oil and water separator device (paragraphs [0033, 0036] — Alghamadi and paragraphs [0023-0028, 0031-0033] and figures 1-2 — Al Majid).
In regard to claim 18, in view of the modification of the preceding claim, Alghamdi further discloses: wherein the cartridge (as taught by both Alghamdi and Al Majid) includes a component (24 — Al Majid) of an energy transfer device (paragraphs [0023-0028, 0031-0033] and figures 1-2 — Al Majid).
In regard to claim 25, Alghamdi discloses: An apparatus (abstract, paragraphs [0016-0024, 0031-0034], and figures 1 & 3) comprising:
an elongated Y-block (i.e., 302 or 304) for placement in a wellbore (116) including
a working space (as shown in the annotated figure 3 below),
a first flow path located uphole from the working space (as shown in the annotated figure 3 below),
a second flow path located downhole from the working space (as shown in the annotated figure 3 below), and
a third flow path located downhole from the working space (as shown in the annotated figure 3 below),
wherein the working space is configured to enable a tool to insert and remove a cartridge (310) from either of the second flow path or the third flow path via the first flow path and the working space while the Y-block is downhole (as shown in the annotated figure 3 below | also, see paragraphs [0031-0034]), the cartridge including devices configured to separate fluids (paragraphs [0033, 0036]).
PNG
media_image1.png
865
781
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Though Alghamdi intrinsically teaches for its “cartridge” to comprise devices configured to separate fluids, Alghamdi is explicitly silent in regard to the limitation.
Nonetheless, Al Majid teaches a similar type of y-block tool comprising a similar type of installable/retrievable “cartridge” (20) — paragraphs [0023-0028, 0031-0033] and figures 1-2, similar to that of Alghamdi. Al Majid teaches for the “cartridge” (20) to comprise of one or more devices (i.e., such as, but not limited to, 24 and 25) to separate the fluids (paragraphs [0023-0028, 0031-0033] and figures 1-2).
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to simply substitute the “cartridge”, as taught by Alghamdi with that of Al Majid, to yield the predictable result of preventing fluid circulation around the ESP and resulting ESP shutdown due to a variety of possible causes (paragraph [0002] of Al Majid). See MPEP 2143, section I, subsection B.
In regard to claim 29, in view of the modification of the preceding claim, Alghamdi further discloses: wherein the cartridge (as taught by both Alghamdi and Al Majid) includes at least a component (i.e., intrinsic seal element of “cartridge”, as taught by Alghamdi, and seal ring 25, as taught by Al Majid) of an oil and water separator device (paragraphs [0033, 0036] — Alghamadi and paragraphs [0023-0028, 0031-0033] and figures 1-2 — Al Majid).
In regard to claim 30, in view of the modification of the preceding claim, Alghamdi further discloses: wherein the cartridge includes at least one component of an ESP (i.e., intrinsic seal element of “cartridge”, as taught by Alghamdi, and seal ring 25, as taught by Al Majid).
In regard to claim 31, in view of the modification of the preceding claim, Alghamdi further discloses: wherein the cartridge (as taught by both Alghamdi and Al Majid) includes a component (24 — Al Majid) of an energy transfer device (paragraphs [0023-0028, 0031-0033] and figures 1-2 — Al Majid).
Claim(s) 19 and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alghamdi (US Publication Number 2024/0287882 A1; herein “Alghamdi”) in view of Al Majid et al. (US Publication Number 2023/0313662 A1; herein “Al Majid”) in further view of Giordano et al. (US Publication Number 2021/0131277 A1; herein “Giordano”).
In regard to claim 19, Alghamdi in view of Al Majid teaches the preceding claim(s).
However, Alghamdi in view of Al Majid is/are silent in regard to: wherein the energy transfer device includes a component of a wireless energy transfer device.
Nonetheless, Giordano teaches “[...] combined wireline and wireless system 400 to set an example mechanical plug 401 in a wellbore and to monitor wellbore pressure below the plug 401 after the plug 401 is set” (paragraph [0062]).
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to modify the energy transfer device, as taught by Alghamdi in view of Al Majid, to be wireless as well, as taught by Giordano, to allow for “[...] monitoring one or more conditions below the plug” (paragraph [0013] of Giordano).
In regard to claim 32, Alghamdi in view of Al Majid teaches the preceding claim(s).
However, Alghamdi in view of Al Majid is/are silent in regard to: wherein the energy transfer device includes a component of a wireless energy transfer device.
Nonetheless, Giordano teaches “[...] combined wireline and wireless system 400 to set an example mechanical plug 401 in a wellbore and to monitor wellbore pressure below the plug 401 after the plug 401 is set” (paragraph [0062]).
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to modify the energy transfer device, as taught by Alghamdi in view of Al Majid, to be wireless as well, as taught by Giordano, to allow for “[...] monitoring one or more conditions below the plug” (paragraph [0013] of Giordano).
Claim(s) 20-22 and 33-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alghamdi (US Publication Number 2024/0287882 A1; herein “Alghamdi”) in view of Al Majid et al. (US Publication Number 2023/0313662 A1; herein “Al Majid”) in further view of Zimmerman (US Publication Number 2003/0098799 A1; herein “Zimmerman”).
In regard to claim 20, Alghamdi in view of Al Majid discloses the preceding claim(s) above.
However, Alghamdi in view of Al Majid is/are silent in regard to: wherein the elongated Y-block includes a component of an energy transfer device.
Nonetheless, Zimmerman teaches a downhole wellbore system comprising an oil-water separator (54) in a multi-lateral wellbore system (see paragraph [0023] and figure 4), similar to that of Alghamdi. Zimmerman teaches that an energy transfer device can be incorporated with an oil-water separator apparatus (paragraphs [0023-0024] and figure 4).
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to modify the elongated Y-block, as taught by Alghamdi, to include for an energy transfer device, as taught by Zimmerman, to provide wellbore telemetry for communicating in a hydrocarbon or water well related application such as downhole or at the wellhead or in a subsea or other oilfield-related environment (paragraphs [0002, 0023] — Zimmerman).
In regard to claim 21, in view of the modification of the preceding claim(s), Zimmerman further discloses: wherein the energy transfer device includes a component of a wireless energy transfer device (paragraphs [0023-0024] and figure 4).
In regard to claim 22, Alghamdi in view of Al Majid discloses the preceding claim(s) above.
However, Alghamdi in view of Al Majid is/are silent in regard to: wherein a computer may sense a one or more parameters of the one or more flow channels, pump, fluid separator, formation fluid, nonproduction fluid, production fluid, solid, sediment, container, emulsion, or a combination thereof, and perform one or more of monitoring, testing, controlling, troubleshooting, adjusting, diagnosing, analyzing, replacing, repairing, and/or maintaining a downhole separation system or component thereof.
Nonetheless, Zimmerman teaches a downhole wellbore system comprising an oil-water separator (54) in a multi-lateral wellbore system (see paragraph [0023] and figure 4), similar to that of Alghamdi. Zimmerman teaches e.g., a computer, communicates with the telemetry system coupled to the oil-water separator for analyzing, monitoring, etc. (paragraphs [0015, 0020, 0023-0024, 0032-0033] and figure 4).
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to modify the system, as taught by Alghamdi, to include for a computer, as taught by Zimmerman, to provide wellbore telemetry for communicating in a hydrocarbon or water well related application such as downhole or at the wellhead or in a subsea or other oilfield-related environment (paragraphs [0002, 0023] — Zimmerman).
In regard to claim 33, Alghamdi in view of Al Majid discloses the preceding claim(s) above.
However, Alghamdi in view of Al Majid is/are silent in regard to: wherein the elongated Y-block includes a component of an energy transfer device.
Nonetheless, Zimmerman teaches a downhole wellbore system comprising an oil-water separator (54) in a multi-lateral wellbore system (see paragraph [0023] and figure 4), similar to that of Alghamdi. Zimmerman teaches that an energy transfer device can be incorporated with an oil-water separator apparatus (paragraphs [0023-0024] and figure 4).
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to modify the elongated Y-block, as taught by Alghamdi, to include for an energy transfer device, as taught by Zimmerman, to provide wellbore telemetry for communicating in a hydrocarbon or water well related application such as downhole or at the wellhead or in a subsea or other oilfield-related environment (paragraphs [0002, 0023] — Zimmerman).
In regard to claim 34, in view of the modification of the preceding claim(s), Zimmerman further discloses: wherein the energy transfer device includes a component of a wireless energy transfer device (paragraphs [0023-0024] and figure 4).
Claim(s) 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alghamdi (US Publication Number 2024/0287882 A1; herein “Alghamdi”) in view of Al Majid et al. (US Publication Number 2023/0313662 A1; herein “Al Majid”) in further view of Zimmerman (US Publication Number 2003/0098799 A1; herein “Zimmerman”) and Al-Dhafeeri et al. (US Publication Number 2023/0228186 A1; herein “Al-Dhafeeri”).
In regard to claim 23, Alghamdi in view of Al Majid discloses the preceding claim(s) above.
However, Alghamdi in view of Al Majid is/are silent in regard to: wherein a computer may comprise at least an instruction from an Artificial Intelligence processor, an Artificial Intelligence algorithm, a Machine Learning processor, and/or a Machine Learning algorithm.
Nonetheless, Al-Dhafeeri teaches a downhole system which manages well integrity. Al-Dhafeeri teaches that a computer can be implemented in the system to instruct, operating or shutting down operations of the respective well(s), with respect to alert(s) associated with well integrity (paragraphs [0106-0111] and claims 1, 7).
Therefore, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention (AIA ), to modify the system, as taught by Alghamdi, to include for a well integrity management system, as taught by Al-Dhafeeri, “[...] to maintain the operability of oil wells at a healthy and a safe manner” (paragraph [0002] — Al-Dhafeeri).
In regard to claim 24, in view of the modification of the preceding claim(s), Al-Dhafeeri further discloses: wherein at least one variable (e.g., “a presence or absence of leaks and a condition of cementing in well casing; determining, using the values of the wellness surface parameters and the values of the wellness downhole parameters, an integrated surface-downhole integrity score”) within the instruction code for the computer may be changed via an artificial intelligence processor of the computer, artificial intelligence algorithm of the computer, a machine learning processor of the computer, a machine learning algorithm of the computer, and/or software of the computer (paragraphs [0106-0111] and claims 1, 7).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEEL PATEL whose telephone number is (469)295-9168. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00AM-5:00PM CST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tara Schimpf can be reached at (571) 270-7741. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NEEL GIRISH PATEL/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3676